User talk:Hellopeople900

This is Hellopeople900's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jack Massey Welsh (YouTuber) (April 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Numberguy6 was:

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Jack Massey Welsh (YouTuber) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Numberguy6 (talk) 23:38, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hellopeople900! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Numberguy6 (talk) 23:38, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

LeBron James quote on Jim Brown

Please do not change quotes off of what was actually said. On his Instagram he said "Rest in Paradise". Please do not change it again.--Rockchalk7 17 16:53, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: JackSucksAtLife (May 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by S0091 was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Resubmitted without improvement. The Hindustan Times was already cited and included in the review. If submitted again without substantial improvement, the draft my be rejected meaning it will no long be considered. This is especially the case for this draft, again, due to all the previous disruption.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:JackSucksAtLife and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

S0091 (talk) 21:01, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider approving the 3rd attempt. I added a source that gave me lots of info. I would appreciate it! Hellopeople900 (talk) 21:21, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are not helping so I reverted you rather than declining again. It is clear you do not understand what a reliable source is. Please do not resubmit the draft as doing so may result in it being rejected. meaning re-submission is not possible. S0091 (talk) 21:53, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Rosalynn Carter, you may be blocked from editing. MPFitz1968 (talk) 21:26, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it has been mentioned in several edit summaries now that saying that Carter "could barely communicate" is not mentioned in the sources supporting her diagnosis of dementia. Even though that is a likely symptom of dementia, the fact it's not mentioned in the sources means it's original research to make such an assumption in terms of including that claim in the article. Please do not add original research into the article, especially when it comes to BLPs. MPFitz1968 (talk) 21:30, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Lori Greiner. Thank you. --Hipal (talk) 16:24, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, however almost every source says that her birthday is December 9, 1969. Hellopeople900 (talk) 18:33, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BLP requires high-quality sources. It doesn't matter how many unusable sources say something. If there are no usable sources, we cannot include it. --Hipal (talk) 16:03, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What sources would you use for BLPs? Hellopeople900 (talk) 19:30, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm unsure about a potential reference, I check WP:RSP first, then WP:RSN to see if there are discussions about it. --Hipal (talk) 22:08, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While many sites contain a subject's DOB, the question is, "Are those sources reliable?" Because some are WP:USERGENERATED, which means anyone might have added the content. Some give no indication of the origin of their content. Some web scrape from other sites with no regard to the reliability or accuracy of that content. Wikipedia is supposed to provide content that (a) comes from reliable sources and (b) can be verified by checking with the cited sources. Failure to do so undermines the credibility of the particular article and, to some extent, the credibility of Wikipedia as a whole. Which is why Wikipedia doesn't use just any source that an editor comes across. Some people have never actually publicly disclosed their DOB and because as already mentioned many sites web scrape without doing any fact checking, they end up having falsified DOBs online.

The above paragraph applies to all content on Wikipedia. but when an article is about a living person, an additional policy applies WP:DOB is clear: "Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public." The only way we editors can demonstrate such publication is by providing citations to reliable sources. As per WP:BLPPRIVACY there are only a couple acceptable options when it comes to WP:DOB. A truly reliable Secondary source(IE a magazine such as Los Angeles Times or New York Times. And preferably multiple of these) reporting their exact DOB. Or a social media post from the subject themselves where he or she confirms his or her birthday and preferably either his or her age or YOB in the same post as well. Failing either one of those, it should be kept out of the article for now. Kcj5062 (talk) 17:19, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Rosalynn Carter

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Rosalynn Carter, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 21:43, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Rosalynn Carter, you may be blocked from editing. Wikipelli ^Talk 23:30, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't edit war

Rather than edit war, please discuss the changes that you are making to Jimmy Carter at Talk:Jimmy Carter. You are removing references and other text without explanation. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:45, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you may not revert that page more than once in a 24 hour period, per the message on Talk:Jimmy Carter. You may not have been aware of this previously, but you are aware now. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:50, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for informing me. Hellopeople900 (talk) 17:51, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently made edits related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. This is a standard message to inform you that post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics.

You have recently made edits related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. This is a standard message to inform you that articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics.

– Muboshgu (talk) 17:50, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2023

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours to prevent further vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 01:20, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

please don’t add keyboard smashes to articles. It’s going to be reverted so quick that no one will see it anyways. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 01:24, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 03:39, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your nonsense edits have continued, so you are now indefinitely blocked. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 03:40, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean??? Hellopeople900 (talk) 13:27, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am confused, I did not do anything wrong. Hellopeople900 (talk) 21:11, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please unblock me. Hellopeople900 (talk) 21:12, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I initially blocked you were adding keyboard smashes to high profile biographies. I would consider that vandalism. After the block expired, you continued making strange or nonsense edits, like the series of ones you made to Netanya. Generally, if an editor repeatedly makes disruptive of nonsensical edits, they are blocked indefinitely, which I have now done. If you want to appeal, please use the unblock template above. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 21:49, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Block Appeal

I have been blocked for adding a protection template on a page when it was not protected. It is now indefinite because I was blocked before for keyboard smashes for 31 hours. I am a new editor and I was not sure how to protect, which was dumb of me for not reviewing the how to before, but if you give me another chance, I promise I will not do any more nonsense editing. I apologize for the problems that I have caused and I would really appreciate another chance. Hellopeople900 (talk) 22:24, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would be unwilling to unblock you given your explanation; note that only administrators can protect articles, non-admins can request protection at WP:RFPP. However, before I unblock you, I want to make sure that you understand that further disruptive edieintg will result in the block reinstated. Is that clear? Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 00:33, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I understand. Hellopeople900 (talk) 00:45, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've now unblocked you-- if you have future questions about editing, the Teahouse mentioned above has various editors willing to give advice and help. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 01:00, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Hellopeople900 (talk) 01:02, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disruption on Bob Barker

I noticed you have been disrupting the Bob Barker article and reverting other editors. Please use the talk-page to explain your edits. Psychologist Guy (talk) 18:32, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use of File:Bob Barker 2007.abc.jpeg

Thank you for uploading File:Bob Barker 2007.abc.jpeg. However, there is a concern that the use of the image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. Details of this problem, and which specific criteria that the image may not meet, can be obtained by going to the image description page. If you feel that this image does meet those criteria, please place a note on the image description or talk page explaining why. Do not remove the {{di-fails NFCC}} tag itself.

An administrator will review this file within a few days, and having considered the opinions placed on the image page, may delete it in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion or remove the tag entirely. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Ирука¹³ 18:53, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This was an unambiguous copyright violation. Hellopeople900, please don't copy things from elsewhere on the internet and place them in Wikipedia. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 20:53, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Length that JSAS has been pending for

The JSAS article have been pending for 2 1/2 months now and I was wondering when it will be reviewed.

Hellopeople900 (talk) 20:52, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 2023

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, you may be blocked from editing. I see you have a history of copyright violations, disruptive editing, vandalism, and now unexplained content removal. Please use the edit summary to explain why you removed content or you may be blocked without further notice. 🔥Jala peño🔥 07:50, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: JackSucksAtLife (November 2)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Robert McClenon was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Massey Welsh.

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JackSucksAtLife.

This draft has been Rejected by a reviewer in the Articles for Creation review process. DO NOT resubmit this draft or attempt to resubmit this draft or prepare or submit a draft that is substantially the same as this draft without discussing the reasons for the rejection. You may request a discussion with the rejecting reviewer, or you may request a discussion with the community at the Teahouse. A discussion will not necessarily agree to a resubmission. If this draft is resubmitted, or an attempt is made to resubmit this draft or an equivalent draft, without addressing the reasons for the Rejection, a topic-ban or a partial block may be requested against the submitting editor, and the draft may be nominated for deletion.

You may ask for advice about Rejection at the Teahouse.

Robert McClenon (talk) 04:45, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

Hello, I'm Your Power. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Eternal Sunshine (album), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ‍ Elias 🪐 (dreaming of Saturn; talk here) 03:11, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024

Hello, I'm PSA. I noticed that you recently removed content from The Boy Is Mine (Ariana Grande song) without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ‍ PSA 🏕️ (talk) 01:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:50, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]